本文關(guān)鍵詞： 勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng) 制度缺陷 立法改革　出處：《西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)法律制度在50多年的風(fēng)雨歷程中,成功地教育和挽救了眾多勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)人員,在穩(wěn)定社會(huì)秩序、預(yù)防和減少犯罪方面發(fā)揮了重要的作用。隨著時(shí)代發(fā)展和社會(huì)進(jìn)步,其存在的問題和弊端逐漸顯露出來,已不能適應(yīng)當(dāng)今法治建設(shè)的需要。近年來,社會(huì)各界對(duì)勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度如何改革提出了許多方案,大體上可分為“廢除論”和“保留論”兩派。本文主張通過立法的形式,對(duì)勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度加以改革,在保留勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)功能的基礎(chǔ)上加以完善,以滿足當(dāng)前社會(huì)需要。主要內(nèi)容包括： 一、勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的法制歷程及其作用。勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)是在特殊歷史時(shí)期下建立的一項(xiàng)法律制度,以1957年國務(wù)院公布《關(guān)于勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)問題的決定》為標(biāo)志正式創(chuàng)建。在經(jīng)歷初期的發(fā)展階段之后,勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)在文化大革命時(shí)期基本處于停頓狀態(tài)。1982年,國務(wù)院轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)了公安部的《勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)試行辦法》,從此,勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度開始走上了正常的發(fā)展道路。經(jīng)過多年的變革,現(xiàn)行的勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度同創(chuàng)建時(shí)期有了很多不同。但就其作用而言,無論在哪個(gè)階段,勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度均發(fā)揮了重大的社會(huì)作用和價(jià)值。 二、勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的缺陷。法律性質(zhì)不明確、未建立科學(xué)的法律體系是其主要缺陷。此外,審批程序不正當(dāng)、監(jiān)督機(jī)制缺乏、救濟(jì)渠道不暢通、罰過其責(zé)等也是爭議比較大的問題。 三、勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)的存廢之爭。關(guān)于我國勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的存與廢之爭,筆者主張應(yīng)拋開字面之爭,從實(shí)質(zhì)意義上思考如何改革勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度,才能使其符合我們當(dāng)前法制社會(huì)的要求。應(yīng)在保留勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)社會(huì)功能的基礎(chǔ)上,加以改革和完善,使勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度更加符合現(xiàn)代社會(huì)發(fā)展的實(shí)際需要,更加體現(xiàn)對(duì)公民權(quán)利的保障和對(duì)社會(huì)利益的平衡,發(fā)揮更大的社會(huì)作用。 四、勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的出路。筆者主張建立起獨(dú)立于行政處罰和刑事處罰之外的法律處分,并引入正當(dāng)?shù)乃痉ǔ绦?將勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)的決定權(quán)交由法院行使,做到?jīng)Q定程序司法化、執(zhí)行管理依據(jù)法律化,這是健全和完善勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的現(xiàn)實(shí)需要,也是實(shí)現(xiàn)依法治國的需要。 針對(duì)勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的改革和完善,本文也提出了具體的對(duì)策建議：首先要明確其法律性質(zhì)為一種強(qiáng)制性教育措施。其次,關(guān)于勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)立法的名稱,本文贊成以違法行為矯治法代替勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)法。不僅使法律名稱更為科學(xué),而且可以體現(xiàn)其豐富內(nèi)涵。在具體制度建構(gòu)時(shí),著重解決適用對(duì)象和范圍、期限、提請(qǐng)和審批程序、法律監(jiān)督和法律救濟(jì)等方面的問題。 總之,本文試圖通過深入探討和研究,使勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度更加符合現(xiàn)代社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)、政治、文化和社會(huì)發(fā)展的實(shí)際需要,在新的歷史時(shí)期發(fā)揮新的更大的預(yù)防和控制違法犯罪的作用。
[Abstract]:The legal system of reeducation through labor has successfully educated and saved a large number of reeducation through labor personnel in the course of more than 50 years of wind and rain, and has been stabilizing the social order. Prevention and reduction of crime has played an important role. With the development of the times and social progress, its existing problems and drawbacks are gradually revealed, and can not meet the needs of the construction of the rule of law. The society has put forward many plans on how to reform the system of re-education through labor, which can be divided into two schools: abolition theory and reservation theory. This paper advocates the reform of the system of re-education through labor by way of legislation. On the basis of preserving the function of reeducation through labour, it should be perfected to meet the needs of the present society. The main contents include: First, the legal course and function of the system of re-education through labor, which is a legal system established under the special historical period. In 1957, the State Council announced the decision on the issue of re-education through labor as the symbol of formal establishment. After the initial stage of development. In 1982, the State Council forwarded the trial measures of the Ministry of Public Security to re-education through labor, and from then on. After many years of reform, the current re-education through labor system and its founding period has a lot of differences. But in terms of its role, no matter in any stage. The system of reeducation through labor has played an important social role and value. Second, the defects of the re-education through labor system. The legal nature is not clear, not establishing a scientific legal system is its main defect. In addition, the examination and approval process is improper, the supervision mechanism is lacking, and the relief channels are not smooth. Punishment and other responsibilities are more controversial issues. Third, the struggle between the existence and abolition of the re-education through labour system in our country, the author advocates that we should put aside the literal argument, and think about how to reform the system of re-education through labor in essence. In order to make it meet the requirements of our current legal society, we should reform and perfect it on the basis of retaining the function of reeducation through labor society, and make the system of reeducation through labor more in line with the actual needs of the development of modern society. More embodies the protection of civil rights and the balance of social interests, play a greater social role. Fourth, the way out of the system of re-education through labor. The author advocates the establishment of legal sanctions independent of administrative punishment and criminal punishment, and the introduction of due judicial procedures, the decision to transfer the right to re-education through labour to be exercised by the court. It is the realistic need to perfect and perfect the system of reeducation through labor and to realize the rule of law. In view of the reform and perfection of the re-education through labor system, this paper also puts forward specific countermeasures and suggestions: first, it should be clear that its legal nature is a kind of compulsory education measure; secondly, the name of the legislation on reeducation through labor. This article is in favour of replacing the law of re-education through labor with the law of correction of illegal acts. It not only makes the name of the law more scientific, but also embodies its rich connotation. In the construction of specific system, it focuses on solving the object and scope of application and the time limit. Request and approval procedures, legal supervision and legal remedies and other issues. In a word, this paper tries to make the system of re-education through labor more in line with the actual needs of modern social economic, political, cultural and social development through in-depth exploration and research. In the new historical period, play a new and greater role in the prevention and control of crime.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D926.8

【共引文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 劉健,賴建云;論我國勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度與國際人權(quán)公約的沖突及其調(diào)整——對(duì)免于強(qiáng)迫勞動(dòng)權(quán)的剖析[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2001年05期

2 盧宇蓉;勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度性質(zhì)之思考[J];法學(xué);2001年05期

3 胡發(fā)明;我國現(xiàn)行勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的合法性探疑[J];河北法學(xué);2001年01期

4 蔡清良;試論勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的內(nèi)在缺陷及其改造[J];寧夏大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年05期

5 白春花;勞教改革與加入WTO后的人權(quán)保障[J];云南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(法學(xué)版);2003年01期

6 馬龍虎;對(duì)我國勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的理性分析[J];政法論叢;2001年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 曲新久;刑事政策的權(quán)力分析[D];中國政法大學(xué);2001年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 馬家利;勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度研究[D];安徽大學(xué);2003年

2 牛步云;勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)刑法化探析[D];鄭州大學(xué);2003年

3 鈕巧福;勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度有關(guān)問題研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2003年

4 江崇德;勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度研究[D];四川大學(xué);2003年

5 田山;勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度研究[D];四川大學(xué);2003年

6 常虹;勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度及其重構(gòu)[D];中國政法大學(xué);2003年

7 趙仲廉;試論進(jìn)一步完善我國勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2002年

8 婁立新;廢除勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的法理學(xué)分析[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2004年

9 朱晉;法治視野中的勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)[D];蘇州大學(xué);2004年

10 李祥杰;勞動(dòng)教養(yǎng)制度的優(yōu)化分析[D];華東師范大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：1464494